Zero-Tolerance; Illegal Border Crossings Have Dropped 70-90% Due to Operation-Streamline; the Prosecuting/Jailing of Illegal Border Crossers:

Zero-Tolerance; Illegal Border Crossings Have Dropped 70-90% Due to Operation-Streamline; the Prosecuting/Jailing of Illegal Border Crossers:
By Marc Chamot & Source: San Jose Mercury News's "Fronteras" Hispanic Edition

Great News for Once!

Here is another good source of information that the mainstream media refuses to cover or report about.

When our government came out and said they had no solutions for the rampant border crossings from Mexico, unfortunately, they LIED; they do have one and it’s been working for the past three years.

There is a little known program to help curb illegal aliens’ trespassers from Mexico. This program began around 2006, known as Operation Streamline. It was brought about by Texas Congressman John Culberson; it made certain border sectors in Texas and Arizona un-crossable through Zero-Tolerance trespassing violations, with serious jail time and imprisonment for violating those rules.

Those caught, usually end up in federal prison facilities, and jailing for these border trespassers lasted between 15 days to six months. For the past three years, within the Yuma sector of Zero-Tolerance, over 8,848 undocumented aliens have been prosecuted and jailed through federal detention centers in New Mexico because of this tough law.

New government figures and statistics show that it’s working, Operation Streamline, is working big time. These statistics also show that the jailing of illegal border crossers are keeping border cities’ free of major crimes and illegal border crossings are way down.

Because of this, the law may get a little tougher for these free wheeling border crossers, the repeat offenders, those who had been previously detained and jailed, it will lead to more severe criminal charges, if they come back, and they will end up serving with the worst of the worst of all prisoners in federal prisons between a year to a whopping twenty.

The fact is, with strict prosecutions and jailing of these border trespassers have been way more effective, than the border patrol, national guards, and the desert heat, the border walls, and with possibilities of drowning from river and creek flash floods.

Even with the threats of bandits and drug cartels haven’t swayed these people from coming across, but the fear of our American jails, prisons, and spending some time in there, is making huge dents in curbing those illegal crossings.

Within the three border sectors where Zero-Tolerance is being applied to on illegal border crossers, there has been a sharp drop of illegal crossings between 70 to 96 percent!

“This message is definitely being reverberated throughout Mexico and Central America.” This program is doing so damn well, that the border patrol Yuma chief Jeff Calhoon said, “we will no longer take digital fingerprints and send them back to Mexico, if they enter this country illegally we will prosecute an jail them.”

Even the Mexican Consul of Yuma, Miguel Estrada has admitted the fear of prison, has virtually collapsed all illegal entries through these zones. Three years ago, about 200,000 Mexicans would cross illegally, and today it’s only a drop in the bucket.

The border patrol has reported that they have detained 6,000 illegal aliens this year, compared to the 350,000 who were apprehended in 2005.

So, to my dear friends, we do have a PROVEN border solution, their three year experiment is working, and so why isn’t congress doing it for the whole border?

We do have a viable solution, a proven one, and this president needs to act on it and implement it.
Here is more information on Operation Streamline:

Information on Zero Tolerance
Congressman John Culberson is working hard to expand a zero tolerance policy towards illegal aliens to the entire border. Under this strict policy, anyone caught illegally crossing the border is arrested, prosecuted, and jailed for up to six months. Below you can find more information about this successful, common sense enforcement policy.

Zero Tolerance – “Operation Streamline”

• In the Del Rio, Laredo and Yuma sectors, the Border Patrol is now using Title 8 USC Section 1325 to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate everyone who enters the US illegally. First offense results in jail time up to six months and criminal deportation, while a second offense is a felony punishable by up to two years and permanent deportation. This law, Entry Without Inspection, was first enacted in 1952.

• Local leaders, local citizens and local Congressmen on the border strongly support “Operation Streamline” because it has resulted in dramatically safer streets. Congressmen Henry Cuellar, Ciro Rodriguez and John Culberson are working together to help BP Sector Chief Carlos Carrillo implement Streamline in Laredo.

• I am optimistic that Streamline can be implemented in the Brownsville sector next, and I will not rest until we have zero tolerance from Brownsville to San Diego.

Operation Streamline in Del Rio and Yuma, Arizona
• The Del Rio sector is now closed to illegal immigrants thanks to the initiative of local Federal District Judge Alia Ludlum, the US Marshals and Border Patrol Sector Chief Randy Hill using existing law, existing personnel, and existing financial resources.

• Zero tolerance has been in effect in Del Rio for nineteen months. Crime has dropped 76%, drug seizures are up 50%, and illegal border crossings have dropped by 52%. The county jail has vacancies because illegal crossings have plummeted in Del Rio.

• Other than in the Del Rio and Laredo sectors, Mexican nationals illegally entering the United States in Texas are released back into Mexico on the same day the first 7 to 9 times they are picked up. Other than in Yuma, Mexican nationals illegally entering the US in Arizona are released back into Mexico on the same day the first 15 times they are picked up. Zero enforcement results in zero respect for the rule of law.

ACTIVITY, DEL RIO SECTOR (19 months)
Caught: 19,471
Sentenced: 18,952
Deported: 16,870
Average of 87 days incarceration from arrest to return to country of origin.

Culberson Recognized for Expanding Zero Tolerance Towards Illegal Aliens
During today’s press conference on zero tolerance in Laredo, Border Patrol Sector Chief Carlos Carrillo recognized Congressman Culberson’s hard work on border security by saying, “I would like to especially thank Representative John Culberson for his support for this program. Unquestionably, his profound interest in border security and his first-hand familiarity with Streamline-Del Rio proved to be the catalyst that made Streamline-Laredo a reality today.”

The following is the complete statement made by Chief Carrillo.

“The Rio Grande sits as a natural barrier that defines the border of the United States and Mexico and of two important metropolitan border cities; Laredo, TX and Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas; both joined by blood, culture, trade and over two-hundred years of history.
“Unfortunately, for many people from southern Mexico and other countries, as the smugglers who prey on them, the area of Laredo and Nuevo Laredo is perceived as a gateway for illegal entry into the United States.

“We are here today to give notice to smugglers and illegal border crossers. Entering the United States without inspection at a place or time other than as designated by immigration officers is a federal offense. Laredo will not be a gateway for people intent on illegal entering the United States. Instead, this route will result in the arrest of illegal border crossers and their prosecution in U.S. federal court.

“On October 30th, 2007 the U.S. Border Patrol Laredo Sector will launch an initiative we call Streamline-Laredo. Under this program, any alien who illegally enters the United States in the Laredo Sector at locations designated for zero-tolerance will be prosecuted in federal court for violation of Title 8 USC 1325(a)(1); and shall be fined or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both.

“Like in Del Rio, TX and Yuma, AZ where Streamline has already been successfully implemented, Streamline-Laredo is an initiative that will become standard operating procedure and represents another tool implemented by the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection’s U.S. Border Patrol to bring greater operational control and security to our nation’s borders.

“This program is a multi-agency program that involves the U.S. Attorney’s office, the U.S. Marshals Service, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Office of Detention and Removal, as well as the U.S. Federal Courts and several other federal, state, county, and local agencies.

“Streamline-Laredo will initially target the border within the City of Laredo’s metropolitan area, and will eventually be expanded to encompass the Laredo Sector’s entire 171-mile border corridor.

“I am confident that Streamline-Laredo will contribute to a safer community by reducing illegal border crossings and the crimes associate with illegal immigration and smuggling on our border. A reduction in illegal alien traffic will also allow Border Patrol Agents and other law enforcement partners to focus on more serious threats, such as terrorism, border violence, and narcotics smuggling.

“To the "coyote" or alien smuggler, illegal aliens represent nothing more than raw material for a dangerous and dehumanizing business. By discouraging people from attempting illegal entry, we cut off the supply of human cargo, shut down the "coyotes" and effectively save lives that might otherwise be lost at the hands of unscrupulous and callous alien smugglers.

“The positive aspects of Streamline-Laredo are not just wishful thinking on my part. They are already reality for communities and residents throughout the Del Rio and Yuma Sectors where Streamline has already been implemented.

“The Del Rio Sector launched Streamline in December 2005. Since then, the sector has seen a 67 percent decrease in illegal alien apprehensions; a 66 percent increase in narcotic seizures; and a 50 percent reduction in the number of alien deaths.
“The Yuma Sector began its program just ten months ago, and is already reporting a 70% decrease in calendar year apprehensions and illegal entries, and a decrease from 800 apprehensions per day to only 30 apprehensions per day along the sector's entire 127 miles of border with Mexico.

"There is no question that the Streamline program works. I have no doubt that Streamline-Laredo will be successful based on the enthusiastic commitment that has been pledged to me by each of the agencies involved with the program. I would like to especially thank Representative John Culberson for his support of the program. Unquestionably, his profound interest in border security and his first-hand familiarity with Streamline-Del Rio proved to be the catalyst that made Streamline-Laredo a reality today.

“In closing, I would like to stress that Streamline-Laredo does not target citizens of any particular country, nor does it discriminate. Streamline-Laredo applies to all aliens who are apprehended attempting to illegally enter the United States at a place other than a designated port of entry.”

Culberson Interview on Zero Tolerance

Losing the News the Future of News That Feeds Democracy; Alex S. Jones’ New Book; Calls “Political Bloggers and Google News, Parasites”

Newspapers Threatened: Losing the News the Future of News That Feeds Democracy; Alex S. Jones’ New Book; Calls “Political Bloggers and Google News, Parasites”
By Marc Chamot

"The threats of political bloggers’ and their influences, have got newspaper editors and publishers reeling."

The San Francisco Chronicle’s Sunday book editorials came out with two book reviews, about the future of newspapers and on the Internet blogging revolution.

They compared two views, one book written by Alex S. Jones and the other by former Salon.com and professional blogger Scott Rosenberg.

What ticked me off, was the embitterment of newspaperman Alex S. Jones comments in his new book about political bloggers like us, he called us and Google News “PARASITES.”

Alex S. Jones, a courtly member of the fourth generation of a newspaper-owning family in Greeneville, Tenn., he fears the future news landscape: "The world that looms will be one of abundant free speech, but may have a dearth of reliable, traditional news."

In his whine and sour grapes book, he calls political bloggers like Marc Chamot, and the thousands of others like me, as "For the most part, political and news-related bloggers are parasites, just like Google News. They do not report news but comment on the iron core of reported news that newspapers and other media are still churning out.”

Here are the proof folks! I told you in the past that newspapers hate blogger’s guts.

I’ve got big news for that so and so, Alex Jones. If newspapers had done a better job in covering the news, but instead of covering up vital news stories throughout the years, during their very existence, maybe this country would be in far better shape than what it is now.

The economic disaster that we are in now, newspapers knew about it since 2005-2006, and refused to warn the nation about it. Their advertising sales and circulations began to tailspin downwards, and they knew that they had serious problems in their hands, on how bad the economy was at the time, but they covered it up.

The real truths about Alex Jones and other publishers like the Hearst family, and Dean Singleton’s are all blogging hating people, because bloggers expand into the news that they write about and report on it. We tend to criticize, expose their biases and errors written by their journalists. And they don’t like it.

They are very jealous of our independence, we as bloggers don’t have a cowardly editor or a publisher telling us what we can write about, or not write about.

They dislike us, because we are tilting the balance of influence over American politics, the kind that they don’t like, and Americans no longer have to depend on these has-beens’ for their entire news. They can count on bloggers to bring different points of views at different angles and from other perspectives.

How influential are we?

Did nationally syndicated, pro-illegal immigration op-ed writer Ruben Navarette read my blog? I’m sure that he has been aware of me and my blogs, because I had numerously blasted his left leaning editorials in the past.

For example, I did an article on this very blog, August 19th called, Is Amnesty for Illegal Aliens Dead? Conservative Blue Dog Democrats; Running 0-3 against the Majority Interests of their Respective Districts

Here is part of my posting:

“One of the key outrages over the healthcare bill was the proposed coverage for illegal aliens; at town halls, it was actually the most boisterous to practically deafening mad, questionings being asked by most folks.

Blue Dogs are in a deep hole, because 49 of them in the house, those who were elected in districts that voted in 2008 John McCain’s presidential bid; have put their political careers at risk.

The Blue Dogs, who came about after the 1994 Republican congress revolution, were a strategy to attract more moderate Republicans into the Democratic Party, like the fiscal conservatives, and they were supposed to be uniquely independents from both parties.

They are supposed to be “fiscally” conservative, but unfortunately for these Blue Dogs, they have violated their conservative principles from their respective districts.They all voted for the 800 billion dollars failed stimulus that increased our deficit, and voted for the anti-American industries Trade and Cap bills.

Both were issues that the majority of their conservative constituents did not support. And now, they want to support Obama’s healthcare bill, which 54% of Americans don’t want.So President Obama, put off immigration reforms till next year.

But with the public heat that he, and the Democrats have been taking behind the public health issues, and its shenanigans’ behind the bill, has put a clamper on the Obama train for unpopular reforms.If public anger over healthcare is any indication, then illegal immigration and amnesty for law breakers is going to be far worse next year.”

Here is today’s Ruben Navarette’s article in some of the nation’s daily newspapers:

Immigration uproar will upstage health care debate
Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009

“If Obama wants to get an immigration reform package through Congress, he will again need help from conservative Blue Dog Democrats. Just like with health care. And if Obama panders to the Blue Dogs too much, he could alienate more liberal Democrats. Just like with health care.

Already, in cities such as Houston with large immigrant populations, protesters who showed up at town halls ostensibly to demonstrate against health care wound up complaining about immigration.

This includes the woman who phoned into conservative talk radio host Michael Smerconish's show last week to ask its special guest - President Obama - if he believed that illegal immigrants should benefit from health care reform.

Obama tried to shut down that line of inquiry in a hurry.

"This has been an example of just pure misinformation out there," he said. "None of the bills that have been voted on in Congress, and none of the proposals coming out of the White House, propose giving coverage to illegal immigrants - none of them. That has never been on the table."

Then, Smerconish asked if illegal immigrants would still be treated in emergency rooms, as they are now.

"That will continue," Obama said. "I think there is a basic standard of decency where if somebody's in a death situation or a severe illness, that we're going to provide them emergency care. But nobody has talked about providing health insurance to illegal immigrants. I want to make that absolutely clear."

At least one piece of health care reform legislation under consideration - House bill 3200 - specifically excludes anyone who is not a legal resident of the United States from coverage of extended insurance provisions.

Those are the facts. But, unfortunately, fear doesn't listen to facts. Even so, here's another fact: While it's true that illegal immigrants use emergency rooms, they do so because most of them lack health insurance. And why is that? It's because their employers don't provide it.

Those are the same employers who often make a hefty gain from using cheap illegal immigrant labor. When those employers do well, the rest of us do well. And when they don't, we don't. The pieces of the economy may seem separate, but they are all interlocked.

So don't tell me that illegal immigrants don't pay their way in this economy. They do, paying all sorts of taxes - property, sales, etc. And they also act as a stimulus by benefiting employers.

Of course, you'll rarely hear that kind of candor and honesty when the immigration debate heats up again. Too bad.”

Hmm, it’s stikingly similar, but put into a different context from mine. Same points same issue. I’m the only one in the media at the time, when I wrote about the Blue Dogs and immigration reforms. So, I’m pretty sure that this cannot be a coincidence at all.

So these newspaper morons, instead of hiring, or working with knowledgeable bloggers like us, and Google News, they rather die a slow miserable death and whine as to why their petty newspapers conglomerates are going down in flames.

After working in that industry for over thirty years, there’s no love lost between them and myself, really.

Books about the news business and blogging
Two very different books are important to understand the tumultuous and disorienting changes racing through the news business.

One, "Losing the News," is an impassioned call to action to preserve the best of traditional newspaper journalism. The other, "Say Everything," is a snappy, insider's history of a new form of communication, blogging.

Alex S. Jones, a courtly member of the fourth generation of a newspaper-owning family in Greeneville, Tenn., fears the future news landscape: "The world that looms will be one of abundant free speech, but may have a dearth of reliable, traditional news."

For Scott Rosenberg, who left the "tired old media world" of newspapers for Salon.com before embracing blogging, Jones misses the point, failing to see the wondrous possibilities of blogging. Bloggers can effortlessly link, to one another and to original source material. They can publish when they want, unencumbered by the unforgiving dictates of a news cycle. They can learn from readers by encouraging their comments.

Missing the gatekeepers
Jones, a Pulitzer Prize winner at the New York Times two decades ago, yearns for a world where gatekeepers (newspaper editors) decide what news is and then assign their own well-trained reporters to cover the news. Rosenberg celebrates the empowerment of self-motivated individuals whose personal obsessions fuel their "daunting productivity."

At the heart of his argument, Jones offers some highly original and sobering mathematical assertions that suggest the precarious hold of traditional news. Jones starts from the premise that it is the nation's newspapers - not television, not digital news - that provide the "vast majority of iron core news," by which he means "bearing-witness" journalism, explanatory journalism and the most expensive and difficult type of journalism: investigative reporting.

Jones estimates that 85 percent of professionally reported accountability news comes from newspapers. Juxtaposed to this high percentage is a much lower one - the percentage in each day's newspaper actually devoted to what Jones calls "high quality" news.

Jones' best guess is that the amount of serious reporting on important topics averages about 15 percent of the contents of a newspaper. Of the remainder, half the space is devoted to advertising and the other 35 percent is taken up with what Jones calls "crowd-pleasing soft news, features, comics, gimmicks, editorials, entertainments, amusements, and such." Now, Jones worries, the "iron core" of news is in jeopardy, and if the iron core shrinks, "the nation will be much the worse for it."

Jones, an oft-quoted and charming traditionalist, directs the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard. He wants editors to make news judgments based on their own standards and traditions rather than the public's preferences. He decries the wide-open digital culture where "the first loyalty increasingly becomes one devoted to anything that will bring readers or viewers or hits on the Web site."

Blogging pioneers
For Rosenberg, the wide-open culture of the Web is an undiluted strength. For much of his book, he profiles pioneers in blogging. One of these pioneers, a quirky software entrepreneur named Dave Winer, defines blogging as the "unedited voice of a person." Or, as Rosenberg puts it, blogging is "a new form of communication, a hybrid of traditional publishing and casual electronic messaging."

Many bloggers, but by no means of all of them, provide an alternative to the work of journalism. Jones writes that, "For the most part, political and news-related bloggers are parasites, just like Google News. They do not report news but comment on the iron core of reported news that newspapers and other media are still churning out."

Rosenberg does not attempt to quantify the percentage of bloggers who do original reporting. Instead, he points to individuals like Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, who has broken important stories challenging governmental action. Rosenberg notes expansively that "blogging could be journalism any time the person writing a blog chose to act like a journalist - recording and reacting to the events of the day, asking questions and seeking answers, checking facts and fixing errors."

At its best, Rosenberg argues that blogging has enabled the sharing of a wealth of knowledge that otherwise would be "private or limited to a small group." And, surely, a certain percentage of blogs have no other intent than (in Jones' words) to be "crowd-pleasing."

Consider one blog Rosenberg cites: Unnecessaryquotes.com, a collection of user-submitted photos of signs where quotation marks are overused.

One sign reads: Mexican "Food."
Is that journalism? Surely not. Is it informative? Probably so. Is it funny? It is to Rosenberg - and to me.

Losing the News The Future of News That Feeds Democracy
By Alex S. Jones (Oxford University Press; 234 Pages; $24.95)

Say Everything How Blogging Began, What It's Becoming, and Why It Matters
By Scott Rosenberg (Crown; 404 pages; $26)

Two Faces of Google Blogger; the Good & Bad, the Maria Amelia Lopez and the Liskula Cohen Stories:

Two Faces of Google Blogger; the Good & Bad, the Maria Amelia Lopez and the Liskula Cohen Stories:
By Marc Chamot

Google Blogger has been in the news lately, both good and bad.

It’s obvious by these two stories that Google is becoming the most popular way to blog around the Net. I use Blogger faithfully, and I have for the past two years.

There are both good and bad things about blogging on the Net.

I’m going to rap once again about my dislike I have for anonymous bloggers. I’m not a proponent of cowardly anonymous bloggers or commentators. Especially those people who think that they can hide behind hidden facades, and come out with their slanderous spills.

Liskula Cohen was a victim of such attacks, in the “Skank of New York” blogger postings, by an anonymous blogger. A judge recently ordered Google to identify its blog poster.

I absolutely support what has happened, and Google was right in revealing the perpetrator, if people cannot be responsible with their blog postings, then they shouldn’t even be allowed to blog.

This has nothing to do with Free Speech as what some want to argue. This is malicious defamation, and slanderous vile of crap that someone, mainly an anonymous poster has posted on the Net against someone.

Cyberbullies should get their dues too; these people belong in JAIL they shouldn’t even be allowed to own a computer. There have been a few high profile suicides over these perpetrators’ evil deeds on the Net.

So folk’s kind of need to watch what they say on the Net, and make sure that they have all the facts right before posting derogatory stuff on someone.

Well heck, I get mad throughout my daily life, I want to plug away some of these people unto my blogs, but I don’t, it’s all about credibility, and having cyberfriends and followers.

Judge Sides With Model Taking On Blogger
Ruling Forcing Google to Unmask Blogger Raising Questions about Free Speech on the Web

“(CBS) A Manhattan court ruling could change the way people blog on the Internet. A judge ordered Google to release the identity of a blogger who trashed Vogue cover model Liskula Cohen on an anonymous blog called "Skanks in NYC," so Cohen can file a defamatory lawsuit against the author.

CBS News correspondent Michelle Miller reports the ruling is raising questions about how free speech will be on the Web. Anne Salisbury, the blogger's attorney, is challenging Cohen's claims that she was unfairly trashed by her client last year on Google's Blogger.com site. But, Salisbury says, her client's defense is based on the Bill of Rights. "These words are not actionable," Salisbury said.

"They were not nice, they were insulting, offensive to some. That does not mean that the law provides redress for these insults. So the defense is really, this is free speech." But Cohen insists the remarks damaged her reputation.

Steven Wagner, Cohen's attorney, released a statement saying, "It is our hope that this ruling will send a message that the Internet is not a safe haven for defamatory speech." But will it discourage free speech on the web? CBS News legal analyst Lisa Bloom said the ruling should be a "wake-up call" to bloggers.

"There's no anonymity. If you defame someone online, the Web company can be forced to turn over the information attached to your identity, your address, so that you can be sued individually."

Google told CBS News it releases user information only after a subpoena or court order, and did not release when they will turn over the blogger's name in this case. Miller pointed out the ruling may make those on Facebook and Twitter and elsewhere on social networking sites think twice about what they post online.”


Then I got the sad news on another Google Blogger. She’s Maria Amelia Lopez, the Internet’s oldest blogger! Can you believe that?

She passed away about a month ago at 97. What a lady she was. Her unique blog out of Spain, wow!

She kind of put her life’s experiences, and history the way she had lived it. I had tears dripping down my eyes while surfing through her blog.

What a special tribute to a fine lady!

You know what friends, if Maria Amelia can write and blog at 97, we sure as heck can do it too. There’s no excuse.

My heartfelt condolences to her family and loved ones, I’m sure that the throngs of fans she has accumulated for the past two years will miss her whole lot.

I just hope that Google doesn’t lose that sweet lady’s legacy on the Net.

Her Blog Description:

"A mis 95 años / 95 years old blogger
23/12/2006 - Amigos de Internet, hoy cumplo 95 años. Me llamo María Amelia y nací en Muxía (A Coruña) el 23 de Diciembre de 1911. Hoy es mi cumpleaños y mi nieto como es muy cutre me regalo un blog. Espero poder escribir mucho y contaros las vivencias de una señora de mi edad. -- (My friends in Internet, today I am 95 years old. My name is Amelia and I was born in Muxía (A Coruña - Spain) on December the 23rd of 1911. Today it's my birthday and my grandson, who is very stingy, gave me a blog.)"

Her Blog: http://amis95.blogspot.com/

Spanish granny dubbed 'world's oldest blogger' dies
(CNN) -- A Spanish grandmother who became an Internet sensation after dubbing herself the "world's oldest blogger" has died at 97.

Maria Amelia Lopez became an Internet sensation with her riffs on growing old and modern politics.

Maria Amelia Lopez, who died Wednesday, began blogging from her home in Galicia two years ago, winning a raft of fans with her eclectic mix of commentary and nostalgia infused with a sharp wit.

She was introduced to the Internet when her grandson set up the blog as a gift to mark her 95th birthday.

It proved a great escape, Lopez later writing: "On December 23rd 2006, my grandson gave me a present, this blog when I was 95 years old ... and my life changed ... now, I can communicate and interact with the world."

She wrote and video blogged about her experiences opposing Franco's regime, modern politics -- covering topics ranging from the Basque separatist threat to Iran's nuclear ambitions -- and poignantly discussed what it was like to grow old.

Her fame even saw Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero drop in for a chat. Visit Maria Amelia Lopez's blog

In one of her last postings in February she said: "When I'm on the Internet, I forget about my illness. The distraction is good for you -- being able to communicate with people. It wakes up the brain, and gives you great strength."

Her family left a posthumous post, thanking readers for their support.
"[There were] 880 days when her blog made her happy... the support she needed to enjoy her last days of life," they wrote.

"When somebody leaves after 97 years, living with joy from the beginning to the end, we can't be sad.

"Wherever you are, grandmother, you will read these comments, all of them without doubt. She will laugh at some, will learn with others, she might get annoyed at the specific 'language' used in some ... but she will be happy reading all of them."

Is Amnesty for Illegal Aliens Dead? Conservative Blue Dog Democrats; Running 0-3 against the Majority Interests of their Respective Districts

Is Amnesty for Illegal Aliens Dead? Conservative Blue Dog Democrats; Running 0-3 against the Majority Interests of their Respective Districts, they Don't Want Make it 0-4 before the Midterms:
By Marc Chamot

"Nancy Pelosi had said recently that she did not care if she loses the speakership of the house over Obama’s healthcare reforms. And it looks like that the so called conservative Democrat Blue Dogs, have that same political suicide pact, or maybe not."

It’s obvious that the public option of Obamacare might be going down in flames of defeat. Obama insists on a bi-partisan support, he wants Republicans involved, because if it fails, then the Democrats and their Blue Dogs can all point their fingers over its failure.

Gibbs: Obama wants bi-partisan bill (no matter what the media says)
“The White House says President Obama still wants a bi-partisan health care bill, despite news reports that congressional Democrats are thinking of using their House and Senate majorities to push through a bill on their own terms.

"The president has said countless times he will work with anybody in any party," said press secretary Robert Gibbs.

Gibbs pushed back on reports that some officials in the White House agree that Republican opposition may block any health care bill, so they are also starting to think about a Democratic-only initiative.

The press secretary told reporters that the parties agree on about 80 percent of health care reform. But that last 20 percent is tough, including the ongoing kerfuffle over a publicly financed health insurance option.

Republicans such as Mike Enzi and Charles Grassley -- GOP members whom Obama has complimented for their bi-partisan efforts -- oppose the public option, saying it would lead to a government-run single player health plan

Keep watching this story. It will be interesting to see how Republicans -- and voters -- handle suggestions of a Democratic power play on health care.”

Even though fifty-two members of the Blue Dog Democrats in the house want to back Nancy Pelosi, the Queen Bee, with the program; it might come with big political risks for their political futures.

One of the key outrages over the healthcare bill was the proposed coverage for illegal aliens; at town halls, it was actually the most boisterous to practically deafening mad, questionings being asked by most folks.

Blue Dogs are in a deep hole, because 49 of them in the house, those who were elected in districts that voted in 2008 John McCain’s presidential bid; have put their political careers at risk.

The Blue Dogs, who came about after the 1994 Republican congress revolution, were a strategy to attract more moderate Republicans into the Democratic Party, like the fiscal conservatives, and they were supposed to be uniquely independents from both parties.

They are supposed to be “fiscally” conservative, but unfortunately for these Blue Dogs, they have violated their conservative principles from their respective districts.

They all voted for the 800 billion dollars failed stimulus that increased our deficit, and voted for the anti-American industries Trade and Cap bills.

Both were issues that the majority of their conservative constituents did not support. And now, they want to support Obama’s healthcare bill, which 54% of Americans don’t want.

So President Obama, put off immigration reforms till next year.

But with the public heat that he, and the Democrats have been taking behind the public health issues, and its shenanigans’ behind the bill, has put a clamper on the Obama train for unpopular reforms.

If public anger over healthcare is any indication, then illegal immigration and amnesty for law breakers is going to be far worse next year.

I don’t think that these “Blue Dogs” want to be 0 for 4 against the majority’s interests of their own districts, and especially when the midterm’s elections come towards the end of 2010. Otherwise, can we say, sayonara my dear "doggie" friends?

Fortunately for us folks, these Liberal Democrat lap dogs, have gotten earfuls from their constituents, if they don’t shape up soon; it will be hello Independents, or hello Republicans, and adios with these Blue Dogs experiments.

Is Chamot’s Blog, What I Think? Being Censored Over Flag@whitehouse.gov, Obama’s White House: “I Want you to be my Net Snitch.”

Is Chamot’s Blog, What I Think? Being Censored Over flagwhitehousegov-obamas-white-house
By Marc Chamot

As an opinionated blogger, I usually like to make good friends, regardless into what spectrums of politics my readers are. Well heck, if our President Barack Obama is a community activist, so am I.

I am an activist on the Net, and I have no doubt that not only myself, but many other bloggers can be extremely influential over certain political issues, if someone can be very persistent about it.

When I write my stuff, I usually try to convince people to fight back on corruptive and abusive governments, mainly ours.

If anyone who has been following my blogs, they know that Marc Chamot is anti-illegal immigration, closed borders proponent, anti-globalization, pro American Industry and JOBS for Americans.

I am also for stricter jail sentences for dangerous and habitual criminals, and I am also a stringent proponent for “freedom of speech.”

Even though I have been negative on President Obama, it’s not because I don’t like him, in the contrary, I want him to do the right things for this nation. And as an Internet community activist, I feel that I must steer him in the right direction.

My sites have gotten rave revues from everywhere; most of my postings are well researched and well thought out.

But unfortunately there’s a problem. I can’t quite put the fingers on it yet, but somebody did not like my http://marcchamot2.blogspot.com/2009/08/flagwhitehousegov-obamas-white-house-i.html postings. This posting alone has brought me traffic for days, and it’s been linked and reposted by numerous sources.

But unfortunately, a miscreant somehow tinkered with my Google links to my site. I am also getting constantly spammed comments in Chinese.

I usually have a great relationship with Google. They don’t have a more avid supporter than Marc Chamot, but it would be a real heartbreaker if it were them who removed my links from Google search engines into my blog.

Somebody did, and it could be also those tech savvy Obama maniacs running loose too? Could it be the Obama goons, the criminal elements of the SEIU? So Google search engines traffic to the “What I Think?” blog has dropped considerably.

It leads me to suspect once again, are Google and the Obama people removing negative stuff on the White House? Are they into censuring freedom of speech from the Internet?

Then on my last post the Angry Americans; Government’s Erosions of Safety Nets throughout the Years, have Created Anger and Despair:
“American Washington politicians are way out of touch with our common folks. They are more beholden to special interests groups, and that is KILLING their tenures and for any future prospects in politics.

Here is one politician who is completely out of touch with the American people by her remarks, "I don't understand this rudeness," McCaskill said. "I honestly don't get it."I have been spending hours upon hours on my blogs alerting and warning these politicians that they better get it pretty quick, and that they better begin rescinding some of these bad laws, that have damaged our safety nets, or we’re going to have a new country soon. Politicians like McCaskill will then say, wow! I didn’t know!”

Blogger Civilianism’s http://www.civilianism.com/gate/ , she was very upset about my postings that she posted a rebuttal about what I wrote.

Citizen Shelley’s profile: About Me-Hi there! I'm a blogger and podcaster and media activist for 3 years. And a proud liberal! Visit ~ http://www.Civilianism.com or http://Civilianism.com/blog If anyone would like to be interviewed for my podcast on any political issues, email me! I also still have the www.citizenagainstlies.com website.

Now let me tell you, Citizen Shelly has nice blogs, she’s a greenie and a progressive, she actually even bought an Entrecard ad in one of my blogs, which she later cancelled and as a token of good gesture I placed an ad on her blog, and then denied my ad.

Sadly to say, some people still confuse me with Republicans. I’m Independent, the only difference that sets me apart from Republicans, is that they support free trade, NAFTA and globalizations, and I don’t. They are the more anti-worker party than Democrats, and it looks like the Democrats are too.
But now on to rebut Citizen Shelly’s comments:

Citizen Shelly said...
"Republicans rage at town hall meetings because they are full of rage in general -- mostly because they lost the last election.This is not grassroots, it's astroturf. If they are really angry at how their tax money is being spent, they would have been raging at politicians the last eight years, when our deficit was going up and up and up and up under Pres. Bush.

More waste under Bush than under Obama by far, including the bail-outs, which BUSH started.It's funny how Republicans don't even remember recent history.I guess Bush really did brainwash people.”

Here is my rebuttal to her comment. Actually, this is from the Examiner.com.
I think it basically it tells it like it is about what’s really going on.

Hopefully Ms Shelly can learn two things from it, freedom of speech and then the true facts about where her progressive politics is going to nowhere.

"Judging by the jeers and rants at Democratic lawmakers’ public forums this August, Obama appears to be facing a populist backlash from Americans who want no part of the wholesale change he promised as a candidate. The fierce opposition is threatening to further erode wider public support for his sweeping transformation of the nation’s medical system."

Read this here:
Analysis: Conservatives try to beat Obama at his own game
By: Liz Sidoti The Associated PressAugust 14, 2009

Barack Obama’s top legislative goal hangs in the balance and his popularity is suffering as critics co-opt his tech-savvy organizing methods, tag him as a bogeyman and disrupt local gatherings on his proposed health care overhaul.Is the groundbreaking campaigner, whose White House political arm is aptly called Organizing for America, being outmaneuvered?

“That’s a fair summary of where things are at the moment,” said Sanford Horwitt, a biographer of Saul Alinsky, the father of community organizing.

“The other side has the anger and the intensity, and Obama’s side doesn’t,” Horwitt said. Harking back to the presidential campaign’s tactics and success, Horwitt said, “This really first-rate community organizing has not revealed itself in the first months he’s been in office, particularly when it comes to the health care issue.”

Judging by the jeers and rants at Democratic lawmakers’ public forums this August, Obama appears to be facing a populist backlash from Americans who want no part of the wholesale change he promised as a candidate. The fierce opposition is threatening to further erode wider public support for his sweeping transformation of the nation’s medical system.

Opposition to Obama’s health care overhaul is both organic and organized, not unlike the very effort he stitched together during his campaign for the presidency. Back then, he seized on the passion Americans had for change from Republican rule, using new Internet organizing tools to harness grass-roots energy and empower people who had never been active in politics to vote for him.

Since he’s been in office, he’s turned that campaign apparatus into a political organization whose top priority now is to drum up support for health care overhaul and encourage supporters to attend events on the issue.

But now critics, many of them conservatives, are turning the tables on him.

Frustrated by what they view as excessive spending and the growing reach of government during a recession, they are connecting over the Internet through social networking sites and protesting at health care events across the country. They are furious and have found a way to let it be known.

Conservative talk radio and television programs are fueling the fire. And, there’s an element of organized opposition: Lobbying groups like America’s Health Insurance Plans, Americans for Prosperity, and Conservatives for Patients’ Rights are encouraging people to get involved.

Much as Obama saw opportunity with the “change” catchword a year ago, the conservative movement, whose organizing roots date to the 1960s and Barry Goldwater, saw an opening in the Democrats’ community gatherings and are using them aggressively.

“What we saw in the presidential campaign was really a social movement to elect Barack Obama, with energy and urgency,” said Marshall Ganz, a community organizing expert at Harvard University. “The right wing recognized that as a powerful threat to them. They saw how much appetite there was from people to engage. So around health care they’ve found a way to countermobilize.”

Angry Americans; Government’s Erosions of Safety Nets throughout the Years, have Created Anger and Despair:

Angry Americans; Government’s Erosions of Safety Nets throughout the Years, have Created Anger and Despair:
By Marc Chamot

The truths, these revolts are not just about healthcare, it a whole lot more. American politics has become more for special interests than for the American people.

Anger towards American politicians isn’t all that new, but it’s now into a boiling point. It’s something that’s been culminating for years, since former president George Bush came into office, which has expanded into dangerous levels for politicians.

It’s their draconian anti-American laws that were pushed in congress since the Bill Clinton years, like the anti-worker NAFTA bills, which has led to thousands of manufacturers leaving the country, and leaving millions of unemployed Americans in the cold. It was also their anti-American consumer protections, bankruptcy laws of 2005 another example, and this is to blame as to why so many Americans have lost their homes recently.

Washington has been coming up with damaging laws recently that have been wiping out American safety nets.

It’s because of politicians’ insistence on passing comprehensive immigrations packages for illegal aliens, when so many Americans have been hurt by them throughout the years, with loss of wages and jobs for cheaper labor, and for their refusals to secure the borders and so forth to protect Americans.

Billions of dollars were spent to keep American companies afloat while the average American was sinking.

It’s that screw you American people mentality that we’ve been getting from these Washington politicians lately that’s got American folks up in arms.

American Washington politicians are way out of touch with our common folks. They are more beholden to special interests groups, and that is KILLING their tenures and for any future prospects in politics.

This LA Times article on their blogs is finally telling the truths, as to what’s really going on with Americans and with their politicians. It’s something that I’ve brought up over two years ago. But the stark reality of it all is finally sinking with some of these politicians.

The Democrats are making a real big mistake by accusing and blaming right wing extremists for their problems, unless they go out to understand, or finally get the picture, that they are going to be doomed pretty soon if they keep their ways!

Here is one politician who is completely out of touch with the American people by her remarks, "I don't understand this rudeness," McCaskill said. "I honestly don't get it."

I have been spending hours upon hours on my blogs alerting and warning these politicians that they better get it pretty quick, and that they better begin rescinding some of these bad laws, that have damaged our safety nets, or we’re going to have a new country soon. Politicians like McCaskill will then say, wow! I didn’t know!

I have seen thousands of other bloggers who think and believe like I do, these politicians want to ignore the realities of things, but they will pay for it in the end.

Town hall anger: Why we rage at our politicians
One day after enduring tirades from constituents in a town-hall meeting that erupted in vein-splitting anger directed at him, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania -- who just switched parties from Republican to Democrat in a state that can turn blue-to-red on a dime -- talked about the experience.

"It's more than healthcare," Specter said on CBS' "The Early Show." "I think there is a mood in America of anger with so many people unemployed, with so much bickering in Washington ... with the fear of losing their healthcare. It all boils over."

The Washington Post's Dan Balz agreed, calling the furor over healthcare reform "a proxy for an even larger fear" that the federal government is taking over the private-sector economy.
Some Democrats -- like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- accuse right-wing organizations of stirring up Tea Party activists with instructions to disrupt rather than debate, calling it "un-American." Texas Democrat Lloyd Doggett, who was peppered with angry questions last week, agrees. "This notion of a grass-roots campaign is totally and completely phony," he said. "The Republican Party has coordinated this apparent outrage and stirred it up."

But Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill said it was "a huge mistake" for Democrats to call the protests "manufactured." True, she said, "both sides are organizing, but that's what we do in a democracy."

And the organizers insist they only tapped a vein of genuine anger.

"Those inside the Beltway need to know that you can't fake this sort of outrage outside the Beltway," said Max Papas of Freedom Works, one of the groups fanning the protests. "It only happens when they are very concerned about what is going on inside of Washington, and it's a clear sign that people are very concerned."

Whatever the reason, the town-hall meetings around the country on President Obama's healthcare reform are offering a vivid display of rage.

In Georgia, moderate Democrat David Scott, an African American representing a majority-white district near Atlanta, had a contentious community meeting on healthcare recently. Tuesday, someone marked up a sign directing constituents to his office, defacing it with a swastika.

"We have got to make sure that the symbol of the swastika does not win, that the racial hatred that's bubbling up does not win this debate," Scott said. "There's so much hatred out there for President Obama."

As for McCaskill, at a town hall on Tuesday, voters shouted, frothed and stomped their feet at the centrist politician who is known as a common-sense moderate. At one point, constituents shouted down her explanations so completely that the senator asked if they wanted her to just go home.
"I don't understand this rudeness," McCaskill said. "I honestly don't get it."

Later, when a man shouted over another person's question, the senator said, "This can't be about who's the loudest."

With 20 more town halls scheduled for today, the protests are likely to continue. And maybe that's just the pull of the American tradition of dissent, the right to disagree with your political leaders without fear of retribution.

As Mary Ann Fieser of Hillsboro, Mo., who attended the McCaskill town hall, explained, "If they don't let us vent our frustrations out, they will have a revolution."

Bitterness Over Women; Pennsylvanian Gun Man Posted His Evil Plans of Murders On the Internet & Nobody Did a Thing:

Bitterness Over Women; Pennsylvanian Gun Man Posted His Evil Plans of Murders On the Internet & Nobody Did a Thing:
By Marc Chamot

One thing that is truly amazing about the Marc Chamot Report is that I have over four times women reading my blog than men do.

Alexa.com is an awesome tool to let you know who’s actually reading your blog.

According to Alexa at http://alexa.com/siteinfo/marcchamot.blogspot.com they are showing my demographics to be much higher amounts of women, who have children, and have a higher education that like to follow my blog.

Gender
Male
Relative to the general internet population, Males are under-represented at marcchamot.blogspot.com.

But I’ve been wondering why, why are women following my blogs a lot more than men? Don’t get me wrong, I do have a fair share of men who like and read my blog postings too.

But it’s not too difficult to figure out as to why ladies out there read my stuff.

I write in support of their issues, especially, cruelty and maltreatments of them by mostly males, religious sects and other killers.

I’ve written some real heart breakers in the past, they were my heartbreakers.

I’ve done a whole lot of postings about injustices being done to some of these women, from the Savage Minnesota’s Craigslist killer, of sweet Katherine Olsen, who was misled for a job opportunity and then was savagely murdered by scumbag Michael John Anderson.

I’ve done a number of children’s postings and made my repulsive feelings felt, about Muslims over their Sharia Laws and their honor killings.

I also did the sad story of the murder of Iran’s princess, which I like to call her, Neda Soltan’s ruthless murder and so on.

There is one thing I can’t stand; it’s the abuse and the killings of innocent women and children. And I will go to bat for them, and for their causes, regardless what other people think, and that will never change.

Now we’ve got another senseless killing of three women, and nine injured at a health center in Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh. The LA Fitness club had this lunatic, George Sodini who some say was seething with anger and frustration in not being with a woman for 19 years!

This idiot say’s that women don’t like him; there are over 30 million desirable women in the U.S. with his estimate.

This man had a 4,610 word Web diary for Pete’s Sakes! On a nine month chronology of his plans to end his misery with a shocking act of carnage at the health club!

For months he ranted on the Net with his anger and frustrations towards women, he even WROTE about using guns and killing women into his Internet diary.

It’s a lunatic’s way of blaming others rather than himself for his problems.

These poor women never had a chance. I will tell you who is to blame for the deaths of these three women, and it’s neither the idiot’s nor these women’s fault.

The REAL blame goes to those imbeciles who have been reading his Internet postings, and didn’t do iota to alert the police, or authorities about his vague threats on other human beings.

Again folks, I must remind people out there, especially women, when anyone comes across a site exhibiting these kinds of behaviors’, DON’T just ignore it, or shove him away as a loon. Report him/her immediately to his Internet server and the police. I would highly recommend notifying the FBI.

Here is a link to a government site that could help you, http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/reporting.htm it is very imperative that readers out there begin to report these Net loons.

This isn’t the first time that there were high profile killings done over the Internet and it may not be the last, after perpetrators post threats on the Net. I can imagine that who ever came across George Sodini’s crazed rants about women, are the real “GUILTY” ones behind this tragedy. They must feel really shameful about themselves about now.

Gunman at Pa. health club was bitter over women
By MICHAEL RUBINKAM (AP)

BRIDGEVILLE, Pa. — Friends mourned for three women fatally shot during their exercise class at a Pittsburgh-area gym by a man whose online diary revealed he felt ignored by women and had an "exit plan" to avenge his rage.

George Sodini went to a sprawling L.A. Fitness Club on Tuesday night, turned out the lights on the "Latin impact" dance-aerobics class for women, and opened fire with three guns, spraying dozens of bullets before committing suicide.

"He just had a lot of hatred in him and (was) hell-bent on committing this act, and no one was going to stop him," Allegheny County Police Superintendent Charles Moffatt said Wednesday.
His 4,610-word Web diary appeared to be a nine-month chronology of his plans to end his misery with a shocking act of carnage at his gym. He couldn't understand why women ignored him, despite his best efforts to look nice. He wrote that he hadn't had a girlfriend since 1984, hadn't slept with a woman in 19 years.

"Women just don't like me. There are 30 million desirable women in the US (my estimate) and I cannot find one. Not one of them finds me attractive," the 48-year-old computer programmer lamented.

It was unclear when the Web diary was posted and whether it had been updated online repeatedly since November or posted in its entirety recently.

Two undated videos, apparently recorded by Sodini, surfaced on the Internet and are posted on Starcasm.net. In one, he tours his suburban Pittsburgh home, starting outside and moving inside the two-bedroom, brick rancher. In the other, Sodini recorded himself standing in a doorway talking about hiding his emotions and trying to "emotionally connect" with people.

During the tour, he points out his computers, living space and a basement where he highlights his handy work, hanging paneling and a suspended ceiling. Sodini notes that a sofa and chair in his living room match and says, "women will really be impressed." He also focuses on reading material on a table that include a books titled "Date Young Women" and a paper with "Office Politics" printed on the front.

Moving through the home, he talks about a newly purchased dining room set, and shows his bedroom, which includes a bed, computer and a dresser.

"It looks pretty clean," he said. "I'm sure she'll be impressed."

Speaking to the camera in the second video, Sodini talks about hiding his emotion, how he thought he had 15 years remaining and how his objective his to "be real and be emotional" and to be able to "emotionally connect with people."

He speaks about how, in a relationship with a woman 10 to 20 years younger, "she has to feel good about this thing."

The health club violence rocked the town of about 5,300 people just outside Pittsburgh.
Killed were Heidi Overmier, 46, of Carnegie, a sales manager at an amusement park; Jody Billingsley, 37, of Mount Lebanon, who worked for a medical-supply company; and Elizabeth Gannon, 49, of Pittsburgh, an X-ray technician at Allegheny General Hospital.

"She can't be gone," said Gannon's next-door neighbor and close friend, Carl Rady, who knew her for 35 years and said she loved to work out and pamper her dog. "It can't happen that way."
Patricia Cowen lived across the street from Sodini for 12 years, and told the CBS "Early Show" on Thursday that it was "really devastating" to find out about the shootings and the online journal. Asked whether he ever seemed disturbed, she said no.

"He seemed pretty focused on life," Cowen said. "He seemed happy.

"I felt like he was just a loner who liked to keep to himself. He would say 'Hi' on occasion. I just never thought that someone like that would be so capable of what he's done."

Six patients remained hospitalized, including the aerobics instructor, Mary Primis, 26, who was listed in fair condition. Primis is pregnant but said doctors told her the baby is fine.
Sodini did not have a relationship with any of his victims, according to police.

In his Web diary, Sodini wrote of planning the attack since at least November and said he tried to carry it out when the same weekly aerobics class met Jan. 6 but "chickened out," he wrote.

His anger stemmed from unfulfilled desire: The women at his gym "look so beautiful as to not be human," he wrote. He complained that women "don't even give me a second look ANYWHERE" even though he was tan and fit and claimed to dress well and smell nice.

He listed his status as "Never married." In a chilling addition, he recorded the date of his death as Aug. 4, 2009.

Sodini did not have a criminal record, and he legally bought the guns he used, police said.
Sodini's family issued a brief statement: "Our hearts and prayers are with the victims and their families and we pray for the full recovery of the survivors."

Sodini graduated in 1992 from the University of Pittsburgh with a degree in computer science and had worked as a systems analyst at a Pittsburgh law firm since 1999.
A neighbor, Connie Fontanesi, said Sodini was so anti-social that "we really didn't learn anything personal about him."

Flag@whitehouse.gov, Obama’s White House: “I Want you to be my Net Snitch.”

Flag@whitehouse.gov, Obama’s White House: “I Want you to be my Net Snitch.”
By Marc Chamot

I just received an email alert from Adam Bitely of http://netrightnation.com/

"President Obama's new Internet Snitch Email address flag@whitehouse.gov"

It looks like that our prez’s White House is now looking for Internet snitches.

What I’m wondering out loud is what can he/they do about it? Well, to us exactly?

And secondly, the snitching is supposed to be on Internet emails and blog postings on the positives, and misrepresentations on his struggling healthcare reforms, and to what will this lead to next?

Shutting down Bloggers like me, or people with dissenting voices, are we all going to be put out of business?

And are we going to be hit by floods of monikers, and Net trolls to cause our websites to malfunction, or cause it mayhem?

OR is he GOING to reward his pro-Bloggers and Email senders, like he's done with ACORN?

Let's wait and see.

*** NRN Blog Alert ***

Fellow Bloggers,

Obama is asking for us to report suspicious reports on Health Care.
Essentially, he wants to find who is behind reporting the truth on his proposed socialized medicine. From the White House:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care.

These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation.
Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to http://us.mc1124.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=flag@whitehouse.gov This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

He is asking everyone to email this address with tips: http://us.mc1124.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=flag@whitehouse.gov This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

“Here is what we need to do. Email that address reporting Barack Obama for not telling the truth on Health Care. Let's try and flood that inbox with as many reports about Obama and his minions attempting to deceive the public as possible.”

Kudos to Mr. Henry Gates! 911 Caller Lucia Whalen Gets Surprise Gifts of Roses from Harvard Professor:

Kudos to Mr. Henry Gates! 911 Caller Lucia Whalen Gets Surprise Gifts of Roses from Harvard Professor:
By Marc Chamot

Wow! What's this world coming to? That was very nice of Mr. Henry Gates, it was very nice indeed.

This POOR lady was vilified by left-wingers; she was labeled a monster and a racist for calling the cops on Gates.

Ms. Whalen did everything a neighbor, or any good witness to a crime would want for someone to do for them. I’m sure that Mr. Gates appreciates someone looking out for his house and properties.

It was something he never thought about when he became bullheaded, acting "stupid," and turned his arrest into a national spectacle, and drawing in the President of the United Sates into this mess, and making him look pretty "stupid" also.

What would have happened if it were real robbers instead of him trying to get into the house, and then taking off with some of his priceless belongings and heirlooms?

I’m sure if that were the case, Mr. Gates would have WISHED for someone to have called the cops. And even a white cop coming to the rescue for his personal properties, would have been fine with him.

When Mr. Henry Gates began to look into the other end of the spectrum, maybe he began to realize “hey! I was a total jerk about this whole thing.” And you were Mr. Gates!

Kudos to you, Mr. Gates! Hopefully this saga will finally come to an agonizing end, eh? And let’s move on into other meaningful stuff.

Harvard prof in arrest uproar makes rosy gesture to 911 caller

(CNN) -- The woman who made the 911 call that led to Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates' controversial arrest wasn't present at the so-called beer summit.
But she got a shot of kindness and a taste of gratitude from Gates himself.

Lucia Whalen received a bouquet of flowers at her office from Gates, according to Whalen's attorney, Wendy Murphy.

"She described them as amazing, and appreciated them very much," Murphy said of the bouquet.
The attorney described the flowers as being a beautiful assortment of what she believed were different colored roses.

There was a note included from Gates, the details of which Murphy would not divulge. She said the note characterized Gates's "expression of gratitude" for Whalen's action.

An officer responding to a report of a possible break-in at Gates' Cambridge, Massachusetts, home arrested the professor on July 16 for disorderly conduct. The charge was later dropped.
The arrest sparked a national debate about race and police relations.

Whalen said an older woman with no cell phone told her that she was worried someone was trying to break into the home, and decided to call 911.

Whalen never referred to black suspects when she called authorities about the suspected break-in.

On Thursday, President Barack Obama -- who had weighed in on the controversy, saying initially that police acted "stupidly" -- sat down for a beer at the White House with Gates and the officer who arrested him.

The meeting has been called the "beer summit."

After the meeting, Obama said in a statement he was thankful to Gates and Cambridge police Sgt. James Crowley for joining him at for "a friendly, thoughtful conversation.
"Even before we sat down for the beer, I learned that the two gentlemen spent some time together listening to one another, which is a testament to them," the president's statement said
Obama's initial comments on the incident drew criticism and later he softened his stance, saying, "I could've calibrated those words differently."

Murphy told CNN that Whalen has been receiving other apologies and accolades from people all over the world, but so far, no beer.